Showing posts with label Current Events. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Current Events. Show all posts

9.10.2013

Threats and Lawsuits Challenge Faith and Marriage Definitions


Wedding cakes and marriage amendments seem to be in the crosshairs of some public sentiment across the nation regarding the definition of marriage. "At least 27 lawsuits have been filed against state marriage amendments, many of them just in the two months since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its historic ruling on marriage earlier this summer" in Windsor v. U.S

"That ruling struck down Section 3 the federal Defense of Marriage Act, saying the federal government overstepped its bounds when it passed that portion of the act.  The justices reasoned that the decision about marriage should be left up to each state, paving the way for a flurry of lawsuits.  States facing challenges to their marriage amendments include: Arkansas, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia. South Caroline is the latest to be added to that list.  There, a lesbian couple is challenging the constitutional amendment approved by voters in 2006.  The complaint says that it infringes on the couple's right to due process, equal protection, and violates the Full Faith and Credit Clause [of the U.S. Constitution] because it does not recognize same-sex marriage licenses from other states."  Kim Tobee, Lawsuit Challenges State Marriage AmendmentSept. 4, 2013, CitizenLink.

Simultaneously with these challenges, personal faith concerns may become irrelevant in the public sentiment regarding marriage.  FamilyRestoration posted on the matter involving an Oregon bakery earlier. Now, those bakery owners in Oregon have been forced to close their business due to falling revenues and personal threats.  The Christian owners of "Sweet Cakes" did not take the order for a wedding cake from a lesbian couple last year, which is currently resulting in their being forced out of business and into seclusion for personal safety. 

American media outlets generally do not report a comprehensive perspective on these types of cases, but the UK Daily Mail is reporting that the owners received death threats over a period of months and dramatic boycotts of their bakery, forcing its closure.  CitizenLink also reported on these events.  

States and families across the nation are experiencing major challenges to marriage strength and family stability.  Family restoration is a critical component to strong states, yet those states and families who try to reinforce family strength with a conjugal definition of marriage (as between one man and one woman for a lifetime) appear to be targeted for that view point.  It seems that neither freedom of religion nor the democratic process are providing any assistance to those holding a conjugal definition of marriage.  

For more publications on why marriage is so essential to family restoration download the article on the proliferation of domestic partnerships and the article on why an employer would want to endorse marriage as a good business practice. 

5.22.2013

ESPN, Wedding Cakes, and Religious Beliefs

In the wake of marriage expansion, people of faith can be maligned for holding to basic ideas of marriage.

Governors for both Delaware (see more) and Rhode Island (see more) have signed into law resolutions to expand marriage for same sex partners.  Meanwhile, private individuals of faith are being coerced into support for marriage expansion, or denigrated for their support of marriage.

At the end of April, ESPN Reporter Chris Broussard came under attack for supporting marriage in an Outside the Lines piece.  See commentary and a link to that segment here.

In Oregon a bakery owner who refused to provide a cake for a lesbian wedding is being investigated by the State for violations of Oregon's non-discrimination act. You can see the case here. This case is just in the beginning stages.

Meanwhile, a Seattle florist is also being sued for refusing to provide wedding flowers for a same sex wedding. You can see more about that story at here.

Regent alumna Anna Adams, now an attorney in Oregon, has written about these issues in her recent article published by the Regent Journal of Law and Public Policy, which can be accessed here.

Family restoration requires people of faith to be able to freely hold to their beliefs on marriage, enjoy First Amendment rights to speak about those beliefs in an appropriate time, place, and manner, and to continue to practice their faith by holding to their beliefs on marriage, as the United States Constitution guarantees. 

Sports stories and wedding arrangement vendors should not be maligned for their views on marriage.

5.14.2013

Gosnell Murder Convictions Illustrate Value for Women, Children and Future Families

Kermit Gosnell was convicted yesterday of 261 criminal counts in his work as an abortion doctor in downtown Philadelphia when he killed babies born alive and recklessly caused the death of a mother who was his patient.

The jury determined that Baby A, Baby B, and Baby C were intentionally murdered while alive, convicting Gosnell of first degree murder, a crime punishable by death in Pennsylvania.  The Washington Post reported on the trial and the convictions on its website.

This was a horrifying abortion-related crime.  The Times reported that media hesitated to cover it because it revealed the gruesome nature of abortion.  They reported that the crimes illustrate the horrors of abortion, how poverty is exploited in abortion, and how race is a target of abortion.  See that article here

Regent University School of Law is producing lawyers who will bring about similar convictions of those who murder women and children.  The Gosnell case proves that criminal laws and clinic regulations can work to protect women, children, and future families harmed by abortion.  Indeed, the law is more than a profession - it's a calling.

10.06.2012

NFL Football Players Speak Out On Marriage


Of all the discussion on marriage lately, none has been so unique as the dialogue between the National Football Players for the Baltimore Ravens, with a few politicians and critics poking in here and there.

Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo has publicly expressed support for same-sex marriage, and Baltimore Ravens Center Matt Birk, after some back and forth with other players, recently expressed his views in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.  Minnesota will vote on marriage this fall.  Birk's candid, focused, measured, and well-reasoned reply
Birkphoto.jpgreveals why he holds his views on marriage protection, and why Brendon Ayanbadejo respects him for those views.

Children have a right to a mom and a dad, and I realize that this doesn't always happen. Through the work my wife and I do at pregnancy resource centers and underprivileged schools, we have witnessed firsthand the many heroic efforts of single mothers and fathers -- many of whom work very hard to provide what's best for their kids.
But recognizing the efforts of these parents and the resiliency of some (not all, unfortunately) of these kids, does not then give society the right to dismiss the potential long-term effects on a child of not knowing or being loved by his or her mother or father. Each plays a vital role in the raising of a child.
Marriage is in trouble right now -- admittedly, for many reasons that have little to do with same-sex unions. In the last few years, political forces and a culture of relativism have replaced "I am my brother's keeper" and "love your neighbor as yourself" with "live and let live" and "if it feels good, go ahead and do it."
The effects of no-fault divorce, adultery, and the nonchalant attitude toward marriage by some have done great harm to this sacred institution. How much longer do we put the desires of adults before the needs of kids? Why are we not doing more to lift up and strengthen the institution of marriage?marriagesign.jpg
Same-sex unions may not affect my marriage specifically, but it will affect my children -- the next generation. Ideas have consequences, and laws shape culture. Marriage redefinition will affect the broader well-being of children and the welfare of society. As a Christian and a citizen, I am compelled to care about both.
I am speaking out on this issue because it is far too important to remain silent. People who are simply acknowledging the basic reality of marriage between one man and one woman are being labeled as "bigots" and "homophobic." Aren't we past that as a society?
Don't we all have family members and friends whom we love who have same-sex attraction? Attempting to silence those who may disagree with you is always un-American, but especially when it is through name-calling, it has no place in respectful conversation.
A defense of marriage is not meant as an offense to any person or group. All people should be afforded their inalienable American freedoms. There is no opposition between providing basic human rights to everyone and preserving marriage as the sacred union of one man and one woman.

Matt Birk has received a great deal of criticism and name calling since his opinion was published, but his teammate Brendon Ayanbadejo came to his defense on Twitter.  “I don’t think he’s homophobic, Ayanbadejo tweeted, “Matt Birk is an amazing father, teammate, man!”  Focus on the Family's Jim Daly wrote a great piece highlighting Matt Birk's express views on marriage and and opening a public discussion on the matter at  http://www.focusonlinecommunities.com/blogs/Finding_Home/2012/10/03/this-nfl-player-said-what?refcd=136901.

There has been a great deal of posting on marriage here at Family Restoration, and you may want to consider again what's happening in Minnesota, Maine, Washington, and Maryland by reading my post on the JURIST at http://jurist.org/forum/2012/06/lynne-kohm-marriage-referendum.php, or here on this blog at http://www.regentfamilyrestoration.blogspot.com/2012/09/marriage-and-election-2012.html.  But hearing it from players for the Baltimore Ravens in a state like Maryland that is politically battling over the issue adds spark and substance to a matter that is significantly important to families not only in Maryland and Minnesota, but across the entire country. 

9.29.2012

African Americans with Family Values Face Tough Election

African Americans who understand the importance of marriage to family restoration face a tough election choice in November. In fact, a recent article by Bethany Monk of CitizenLink is entitled "Black Voters Say They May Stay Home on Election Day." In the September 17, 2012 piece Monk writes: "Left with the option of voting for a presidential candidate who supports same-sex marriage or one who practices the Mormon faith, some black pastors are encouraging their congregations to just stay home on Election Day." Read that entire article here at http://www.citizenlink.com/2012/09/17/black-voters-say-they-may-stay-home-on-election-day/.

The Huffington Post is also reporting a similar story at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/16/african-american-christians-voting-election_n_1887956.html. It is very significant that President Obama won 95 percent of black votes in 2008, but many of those voters are not certain they will repeat that vote. "When President Obama made the public statement on gay marriage, I think it put a question in our minds as to what direction he's taking the nation," said the Rev. A.R. Bernard, founder of the predominantly African-American Christian Cultural Center in New York. According to the Post, Bernard's endorsement is much sought-after in New York and beyond, but he's unsure how he'll vote this year. According to The Associated Press (AP), most churchgoers cannot support same-sex marriage, as President Obama has done publicly since May. Another point for African-American voters is the previous prohibition on blacks into the priesthood of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Although the ban was lifted in 1978, church authorities never explained why, and never issued a formal apology.

These concerns tend to leave African-American Christian voters in a conundrum. It is unclear just how widespread the sentiment is that African-American Christians would be better off not voting at all. Many pastors have said that despite their misgivings about the candidates, blacks have fought too hard for the vote to ever stay away from the polls.

According to the Washington Post, Obama faces widespread discontent among black voters. Read that piece at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-faces-growing-discontent-among-black-voters/2011/09/23/gIQA3vYurK_story.html. Family values are a primary concern, along with joblessness, and a poor economy.

A valuable vote is not something to waste. The challenge is to use that vote to make a difference. Exercising the freedom to participate in the American Democracy is a significant victory in and of itself. Voting for values in that critical opportunity should not be passed up.

Marriage makes families strong, and strong families make a stronger nation. Whatever your race, ethnicity, religion, or creed, vote to bring restoration to families that need it. Marriage is absolutely vital to family restoration - and one vote can make a tremendous difference.

9.06.2012

Marriage and Election 2012


Marriage was the focus of discussion at the NAACP Convention last week, noting the strong stance for marriage in the African American community:

A study by the Brookings Institution has shown that for those that graduate from high school, who get a full-time job, and wait until 21 before they marry and then have their first child, the probability of becoming poor is two percent. And if those factors are absent, the probability of being poor is 76%," said Gov. Romney, "Here at the NAACP you understand the deep and lasting difference that family makes. [...] Any policy that lifts up and honors the family is going to be good for the country and that must be our goal. As President I will promote strong families and I will defend traditional marriage.

NAACP members in the audience then gave Gov. Romney strong applause in response to his pledge. The significance of marriage to family and community strength is clearly embraced by many of the American electorate.

Voters in four States will face marriage referendums in November. I recently was asked to post this piece in the U Pittsburg JURIST, also available at http://jurist.org/forum/2012/06/lynne-kohm-marriage-referendum.php. Election 2012 will have a significant impact on family restoration.

Marriage and Grassroots Democracy in 2012


JURIST Guest Columnist Lynne Marie Kohm of Regent University School of Law says that the November 2012 elections will involve historic referendums in several states on legislation related to same-sex marriage...
________________________________________




The legislative and democratic events surrounding marriage have been anything but uneventful over the past year, and promise to be all the more interesting through the November elections. Among the states active in marriage legislation, North Carolina has been at the helm, with the state approving a marriage amendment in May 2012. Legal academics from Duke to Campbell [PDF] have been discussing the results of the referendum. Despite the great political pressure surrounding the vote, the people of North Carolina voted to protect and ensure the definition of marriage in their state constitution. Effective immediately, North Carolina joins the 31 other states [PDF] in the US that have made a similar constitutional resolution. That edict is not without question, as a recently filed lawsuit challenging the state's adoption regulations could also implicate the amendment.
Looking ahead to November 2012, other states will vote on constitutional guarantees for marriage, namely Minnesota, Maine, Washington and Maryland — all in the wake of US President Barack Obama's open endorsement of same-sex marriage. Minnesotans will head to the ballot box in November to vote on a referendum that will protect marriage from expansion to same-sex unions. Maine will also vote on marriage in the 2012 ballots — again — but differently than in the past. In 2009 Mainers voted to defeat marriage expansion despite that state's legislative move toward same-sex marriage. As one local news publication reported, "[a]fter the Legislature approved gay marriage three years ago, opponents forced the question before voters, who overturned the law 53 percent to 47 percent." The upcoming vote in Maine will be the first of its kind. Not because it is a rerun of the previous 2009 ballot, but because it is the first democratic test of same-sex unions anywhere in the country — one driven by the people and put to a popular vote.
Washington voters will cast their ballots on a same-sex marriage measure in November similar to, but distinct from, the Maine initiative. This referendum is driven by the state legislature and the vote is framed to endorse the same-sex marriage law approved by legislators earlier this year. If passed, the referendum would effectively expand marriage to include homosexual couples.
Maryland is also set to vote on same-sex marriage in November due to an interesting legislative strategy to expand marriage to include same-sex couples despite legislative and grassroots opposition. In March, Maryland became the eighth state to approve marriage expansion by passing the Civil Marriage Protection Act. Rather than becoming effective immediately, the bill was amended so that it would not take effect until 2013, allowing for a possible voter referendum in November. Recent grassroots efforts will likely force the referendum. Among the major political groups pitted on each side of these referendums are the privately funded Washington, DC-based National Organization for Marriage, which was involved in ballot measures that overturned same-sex marriage in California and Maine, and Marriage Equality, part of the federally funded Human Rights Campaign, which is "the largest civil rights organization working to achieve equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans," according to its website.
What is happening in Maine and Washington is being analyzed by activists in other states wishing to expand marriage. For example, Oregon is one of 32 states that have already democratically integrated a state constitutional marriage amendment. However, that has not kept innovators from considering how to amend the state's constitution again. A strategy to overturn Oregon's marriage amendment would follow an ambitious two-pronged approach that first requires a state-wide vote to remove the current constitutional amendment, and then a national initiative to have Congress or federal courts act to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
During the 2012 election season, scholars and political pundits will be interested to observe whether legislatures can lead their constituents to extend marriage to same-sex couples. Prior to this year, all referendum votes have been democratically endorsing marriage without expansion by fairly wide margins [PDF]. The upcoming November 2012 elections regarding marriage will be the feature attraction, second only to the vote for the presidency. The last presidential determination electing Obama suggested a connection between Californians who voted for his candidacy and those in favor of marriage and Proposition 8 [PDF]. Without counting the California vote, Americans have been a part of 32 decisions in 32 state referendums that have affirmed marriage without expansion. The 2012 democratic process promises to be exceptionally interesting.

Reprinted from JURIST.org, at http://jurist.org/forum/2012/06/lynne-kohm-marriage-referendum.php

5.09.2012

Michelle Bachmann Addresses Regent Graduates as America's Hope for Restoration

Saturday's graduation ceremonies at Regent University was highlighted by an inspiring speech by Minnesota Congresswoman and past Presidential Candidate Michelle Bachmann. A member of the last graduating class of the Coburn School of Law—originally housed at Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, Okla., and moved to Regent Law School—Bachmann is well acquainted with the heritage of the university, holding a Regent University Juris Doctor diploma herself. She conveyed that these graduates are the hope for restoring America.

Recounting the faith history of Virginia, the faith founding of America, all linked with the faith of graduates and the myriad prayers of their family members and friends who supported them in their degree completion, Representative Bachmann weaved a beautiful tapestry of the historical moment in each graduate's life. "My purpose today is to remind you that none of this would have been possible without the generations who have come before you," she said. "Everything you see here is a result of faith and prayer."

"Facebook and Twitter feeds swelled with congratulatory comments and declarations of freedom this weekend as 1,226 Regent University graduates closed one chapter of their lives to begin another at Commencement on Saturday, May 5. More than 5,500 friends and family members attended the event to celebrate as graduates from all eight of the university's schools crossed a sunbaked stage on the Library Plaza at Regent's campus in Virginia Beach, Va." See the full article here.


Restoration is desperately needed, on a personal basis, and a national basis. Bachmann warned of the "urgent, perilous times" the graduates are entering. Bachmann responded to a call to law school, and understands what it means to enter the arena of conflict toward authentic hope, change and restoration.

"Bachmann said the 'eternal truths' she learned in law school guided her career and would guide those of the graduates, too. 'As believers, we cannot shy away from political problems, and we shouldn't. There's a move to tell Christians to get out of politics. Don't listen to it.' It's the spiritual problems she witnessed that caused her to run for president, she said. Bachmann withdrew from the Republican presidential nomination race in January, and she endorsed Mitt Romney on Thursday when they visited Portsmouth. 'In the political world that I have been called to, I certainly cannot escape from the seriousness of the hour we live in,' Bachmann said. 'I do believe these are urgent, perilous times. And I think it's directly tied to the fact that for too long, our nation has neglected a fidelity to the truth of God's word.' Regent graduates have been entrusted with an important role in society, she said: 'We are all called to minister somewhere in some way. You have been called, each one of you'." See the full article here at the Virginian-Pilot.

Representative Bachmann has visited Regent's Family Law classes in the past to discuss family restoration for children who desperately need families. Restoration happens one child at a time finding a family; one person at a time reconciling to peace with God; one marital reconciliation at a time; one family restoration at a time; and one graduate at a time - investing his or her life for hope and restoration for a world in need.

North Carolina Supports Marriage

North Carolina joined 40 other states in cementing marriage as the basis of society, and the foundation of family law with a vote of 61% in favor of marriage, and 39% voting against the amendment, favoring marriage expansion instead.

This constitutional amendment holds judicial restraint on marriage from any recognition of a marriage-like relationship that does not meet the now-North Carolina definition, and orders that those relationships valid in other jurisdictions not be recognized in the State. See the MSNBC story on the constitutional referendum at
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/08/11584860-backers-of-north-carolina-gay-marriage-ban-state-no-longer-vulnerable. See the New York Times article on it here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/us/north-carolina-voters-pass-same-sex-marriage-ban.html?partner=rss&emc=rss.

I have written on this topic widely, from the collateral effects of marriage expansion, to the importance of marriage to children and States generally, and the effects of marriage on wealth and business. Those articles can be accessed through my scholarship posted on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at http://ssrn.com/author=183817 . This scholarship affords a more in depth analysis of marriage from a family law foundation toward family restoration.

Marriage is now supported by more than 80% of the United States. The move toward marriage expansion and away from the solid foundation of one man and one woman is once again resoundingly declined. If not obvious to the media and legal elite, marriage and its meaning is most obvious to the general public as a foundation for society, the family, and the best chance for the thriving stability of children.

5.01.2012

Murder, Money, Mommy's Boyfriend, and the Need for Marriage to Protect Children



Las Vegas recently commended a new child welfare campaign to confront "[t]he maddening, tragic trend of children being murdered by the abusive boyfriends of their single mothers has the full attention of valley law enforcement, social workers and researchers. On Wednesday, as part of National Child Abuse Prevention Month, a coalition led by UNLV's Nevada Institute for Children's Research and Policy launched the "Choose Your Partner Carefully" campaign. The drive, which already is under way in other communities across the country, attempts to educate parents about qualities in a partner/caregiver that officials say can put a child at risk for abuse." Glenn Cook's article, A New Child Welfare Campaign, can be found at the Las Vegas Review-Journal in its April 4, 2012 edition.

"The state-funded campaign will place posters at bus stop shelters and fliers and brochures at community centers, medical offices, schools, child care providers, domestic violence shelters and government offices." (You can download the posters and literature at the Internet links listed with this column. [pdf])

Cook first wrote about this issue in January 2011 in a column headlined "Single moms, boyfriends and dead kids." He states, "Las Vegas police reviewed child abuse and neglect homicides between 2005 and 2010 for me and found they were most often carried out by the mother's boyfriend, with 11 such cases in those six years in Metro's jurisdiction. I also learned that the FBI's national homicide data list 17 categories for a homicide victim's relationship to the killer, and "mother's boyfriend" isn't one of them. It's a crime in need of deeper examination."

Last week the Nevada Institute for Children's Research and Policy reported that "in almost half of abuse and neglect homicides reported by all Clark County jurisdictions over the past two years, the perpetrator or suspect charged in the crime was the mother's boyfriend."

The "Choose Your Partner Carefully" campaign, however, has an overall message that's good advice to anyone on the dating scene, regardless of whether they have kids. Its literature is long-winded with an occasional lecturing tone, covering not only undesirable personality traits, but infant-care basics and phone numbers to report child abuse. Some of the campaign's targets might not be able to read. Previous successful child welfare campaigns have had far simpler messages that were relevant to far more parents. For example, installing child safety seats in cars; telling parents not to leave their children alone in a vehicle; locking access points to swimming pools and never letting kids swim alone to prevent drownings. Elected officials created laws mandating car seat usage, establishing penalties for leaving a child alone in a car and, in some cases, mandating the installation of alarms and special gates to create protective barriers to swimming pools. ... Phebus noted that agencies involved in the campaign have seen untold numbers of cases in which a child has survived the severe abuse of mom's boyfriend -- cases that don't usually make the news."

This issue of indiscriminate choices in child welfare was taken up by a Regent Law student in a Juvenile Law class this spring. In his article, For Richer, Not Poorer: A Marriage Proposal Through the Welfare System, Justin M. Coretti, J.D. Candidate 2012 presents a solution for states to consider in reducing the harm to children of cohabitation, but he focuses on state economic welfare costs.

Coretti notes, "A 2010 study by the Citizens Budget Commission, an objective and independent leader in “advocating for government reform,” strongly recommended New York State cut $20 billion from its budget in order to help decrease the state’s outstanding $120 billion debt. Andrew Cuomo, New York’s governor, laid out an emergency budget plan which should reduce the $9 billion budget gap during the 2012 fiscal year. Cuomo acknowledged the dire need for the State of New York to modify its budget quickly while refraining from raising the tax rates in one of the highest taxed states in the country; additionally, the brunt of the problem, as Cuomo explained it, is simply that New York spends too much money."

The article examines whether the current state of New York’s welfare laws encourages non-marital births to families on state social assistance, fostering further family fragmentation and generating greater costs to the New York taxpayers. Section I briefly discusses the cost of the welfare program to the State of New York, offering an overview of the rules and regulations of New York’s welfare program. Section II examines how two states, Oklahoma and Florida, have strengthened families through state-wide marriage promotion and preservation programs, including through the use of state assistance programs for those below the poverty level. Then section III presents possible measures which the State of New York could implement to better serve the welfare beneficiaries, their families, and family and financial strength throughout the State of New York.

His article offers solutions for New York State to encourage marriage in fostering family strength, thus providing for the best interests of children in any state social assistance program, protecting the child with marriage that fosters personal responsibility, and protecting the state taxpayer with fiscal responsibility. The complete article can be viewed here.

Family restoration requires protection of children by their parents, and state economic responsibility that fosters that family strength with the stability afforded by marriage. Mommie's boyfriend will have no place or opportunity to harm the children when marriage is encouraged, and cohabitation is not subsidized.

4.19.2012

Day of Dialogue Prepares Teens for Sensitive Advocacy

Christian parents generally want kids to live a life modeled after Jesus Christ. He never held back from pouring out His love for hurting people, while simultaneously sharing life truths. That can happen today, on the Day of Dialogue.

Bullying, homosexuality and identity have become hot topics these days—not only in public schools, but also in the culture at large. So how's a Christian teen to respond? First Timothy 4:12 says, "Don't let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in life, in love, in faith and in purity." To equip teens to live out that principle, Focus on the Family annually sponsors a national event—Day of Dialogue®—that enables students to express their Biblical viewpoint in a loving and redemptive way.

The Day of Dialogue—happening today April 19, 2012—challenges students to reflect the true model presented by Jesus Christ in the Bible—who didn't back away from speaking truth, but neither held back in pouring out His incredible, compassionate love for hurting and vulnerable people. On the website, students will find several helpful resources, including "Conversation Cards" and poster and t-shirt designs to help raise awareness.

Parents and teens together can make a world of difference.

"Preach the gospel at all times; when necessary use words." Saint Francis of Assisi

4.07.2012

Religious Liberty, Family, & Authentic Promises

A Lawyer Priest, Fr. Sammie L. Maletta, Jr. is pastor of Saint John the Evangelist R.C. Parish, Saint John, Indiana. Passionate about his love for the Lord Jesus, Fr. Maletta has felt betrayal by current government administrators in their promises of protected faith and conscience concerns.

Religious liberty is eroded by government health care requirements on reproductive services that terminate life. Below is a sermon that Fr. Maletta preached on February 5, 2012 that tackles this very real problem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltTd81XpDnc.

Religious Liberty Homily.mp4

"First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews [Catholics], but I was not a Jew [Catholic] so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
-- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

More than two thousand years ago, Jesus proclaimed victory over the grave to give eternal life for all who believe in him. In John 5:24 he promises that "Whoever hears My Word and believes Him who sent Me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life."

It is finished.

4.03.2012

Health Care Fix for Families


The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was the focus of Supreme Court Arguments last week. Whether such a federal law can require health insurance participation of all Americans was a large focus. Recognizing this and other concerns, Garrett Stevenson, Candidate for Juris Doctor, 2012, and Staff Editor, Regent University Law Review has written a piece for Elder Law about PPACA and how to fix it.

His article examines whether a federal law allowing individuals to purchase health
Americans by giving more choice of coverage and lower costs. Section I discusses the history of health care in the United States, including the policies that have led to higher costs for some individuals and proposed state legislation to counteract this trend. Section II examines and analyzes the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) as it relates to where individuals may purchase health insurance, and a statistical analysis of the legislation. Section III then presents and examines the alternative option of amending PPACA to allow individuals to purchase health insurance premiums from any state they choose and why opponents’ fears of allowing this freedom are unfounded.

Amending the federal law by allowing individuals to purchase health insurance across state lines would decrease the number of uninsured Americans, lower costs for both individuals and the federal government, and create more efficiency for families generally by providing the right amount of health insurance to meet each individual’s needs. Read the entire article here.

4.02.2012

Vaccines, Parent's Rights and HPV

When Lisa Kneen's son Caleb was five, his father took him to the emergency room at Spruce Pine Hospital to be treated for an injury he received while riding his bicycle. After he and his father returned to their home in Bakersville, N.C., a lady from the Department of Social Services knocked on their door. Something about the visit did not feel right to Kneen. "I didn’t want to let her in," Kneen said, "but she said she had the right." So she let her in.

A nurse at the ER had noticed that Caleb had not received all of his shots and notified social services.

The Kneen family is one of many families across the United States who opt their children out from getting certain shots like the measles-mumps-rubella-vaccine, or the human papilloma virus [HPV] vaccine. Some families reject vaccinations for health concerns, others have religious reasons.

Currently, families in Virginia who share similar views with that of the Kneen family are forced to go through a lengthy process to opt their children out of receiving the HPV vaccine. Virginia law requires girls to receive the HPV vaccine before the sixth grade to prevent cervical cancer. House Bill 1121, recently introduced by Delegate Kathy J. Byron to the Virginia General Assembly, would have repealed the mandatory HPV vaccine in Virginia. However, CBS reports that it was tabled yesterday until next year’s General Assembly Session by the Senate.

Mandatory vaccinations are a controversial issue, especially among state legislatures. The National Conference of State Legislatures [NCSL] reports that since 2007, Washington, D.C. and at least 41 states have proposed legislation regarding the HPV vaccine. Some legislation required mandatory school vaccinations. However, the NCSL also reports that as of 2011, 20 states have some type of philosophical exemption law that allows people to opt-out.

That philosophical exemption law, or an opt-out of the mandatory vaccination, is often used when families are skeptical of the ingredients and preservatives in vaccines and when they believe there might be a possible connection between vaccines and autism.

Donna Clearman, an independent dietary consultant from Anoka, Minn., said that she does have some health concerns about vaccinations for young infants. "Infants who are breast-fed have an automatic immunity conferred to them through the breast milk and are not in need of vaccinations for at least six months," she said. "The additives and preservatives in vaccination are foreign substances that stress the infant’s immature system."

Clearman believes that individuals should have the right to decide what is best for themselves and their children. "I think breast-fed infants of healthy mothers should be exempt from vaccinations," she said.

Vicki Goodwin, a home-schooling mother from Flagstaff, Arizona, also has concerns about vaccinating her children. After her oldest daughter Kristin had an adverse skin reaction and started screaming upon getting her second polio vaccination, Goodwin did not continue with the other vaccinations. "After this, I decided I wasn’t going to do this again," she said. "I didn’t know how it would affect my future children."

Instead, Goodwin began to research other options and used homeopathic medicines to attempt to build up her daughters’ immune systems. Vaccination ingredients like mercury also caused Goodwin to question its use. She does not believe the government should mandate vaccines. "I think it should be a parental choice," she said. "It should be a family matter."

Many families have concerns about vaccines, but previous concerns about a connection with autism may not be accurate, according to an article published in the Science Insider. Recent consensus in the scientific community shows that there may not be a connection between the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autism.

Gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield, formerly working at a hospital in the United Kingdom, published an article in 2008 linking the vaccine with autism and bowel disease. However, in 2012, the British General Medical Council convicted Wakefield of four counts of dishonesty and 12 counts of endangering children.

Dr. Kim Vore, a Family Practitioner from Washington, Pa., said there is a lot of misinformation about the risk of vaccine. "Vaccines have reduced the number of incidents of disease," she said. "There’s a decrease in the number of people dying and serious side effects…a lot of people are not aware about improved vaccines."

Vore thinks that if there is a public health menace, then some vaccines should be mandatory. However, there should be exceptions if someone had a previous allergic reaction to certain components within the vaccine.

Vore does have some concern about the state passing the laws that would mandate vaccines. Because the vaccines are constantly being looked at, she said, there needs to be some flexibility if science says the vaccine is no longer necessary. "Laws are not always flexible," she said.

Dr. Alan Morrison, an infectious disease physician leader at Inova Fairfax Hospital in Virginia, said that there is a stronger chance that infants are developing autism because women are having babies later on life, rather than getting it from vaccines. "Biology is not as forgiving," he said.

Morrison said there are no vaccines that have zero risk, but incidences of complications are extremely rare. He said in metropolitan areas, where there are some cases of unusual infectious diseases when foreign born residents come to live or visit, the "Instances are great reminders why we’re doing what we’re doing."

Health concerns about vaccines are prevalent among parents who opt-out of the mandatory vaccines, but they have other concerns as well. Professor Lynne Marie Kohm, Professor of Family Law at Regent University said, "Some vaccines are clearly wise and wanted by parents, such as those that have protected children from life-threatening contagious diseases."

She said, however, that when those requests become mandates that assume "self-destructive behavior like drug use and child sexual activity…the government is presuming that parents are no longer wise enough to provide for their children’s best interest."

"My position has always been that this vaccine is overreach on state action into private family matters constitutionally protecting the fundamental rights of parents to direct the upbringing of their own children," Kohm said.

Sheri Craft, from San Antonio, Texas and a mother of 11, said that the government has no authority to force anyone to get vaccinated. "One might argue that they have the duty to protect us from making a ‘bad’ choice and getting a disease if we don’t get vaccinated," she said. "But, that is going beyond the scope of their responsibility. That choice is up to each one of us."

This thoughtful post is from guest blogger Kaitlyn Speer, who is an intern at World Virginia, and a student at Patrick Henry College.

3.26.2012

Rx for Florida Medicaid in light of PPACA


As states struggle with the growing costs of Medicaid as well as the uncertainty surrounding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("PPACA"), they are working to manage the costs of Medicaid while at the same time maintaining adequate healthcare for their citizens. PPACA will challenge families' financial health, and bring new economic burdens to states.

Florida Governor Rick Scott recently pledged, "In light of the threat of ObamaCare's rapid growth of Florida's Medicaid population, we must ensure Floridians have the doctors they need to receive quality care, while also protecting taxpayers from out-of-control Medicaid costs."[i][i]

Is there a way to ensure that Medicaid has enough funds without Floridians incurring additional taxes? Whitnae Hallbauer, Regent Law J.D. 2012, has written an article which considers whether the Florida intestate succession statutes, which allow for a decedent's children only to take part of the intestate estate with the surviving spouse should be altered to allow for the elderly parents of the decedent to take part of the intestate estate as well when the parents rely on Medicaid. She writes, "In order to help alleviate the problems that the Medicaid program in Florida will be facing in the future, especially since the elder generation population will continue to grow in the upcoming years, Florida may need to temporarily change the intestacy statutes as one option to relieve the burden of Medicaid." Read her article here.

New health care laws will challenge states and families economically, and may even carry with them new concerns for family deconstruction.

________________________________________

[i][i] Governor Scott Signs Legislation Reinforcing Florida’s Health Care Safety Net, THE OFFICE OF THE 45TH GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA RICK SCOTT (July 1, 2011), http://www.flgov.com/2011/07/01/governor-scott-signs-legislation-reinforcing-florida%E2%80%99s-health-care-safety-net/.